What to pay special attention to when purchasing a swimsuit. Pay special attention Pay special attention to

In television reports from various meetings of our first leaders with high-ranking officials - ministers, governors, heads of the largest state corporations - one involuntarily pays attention to the replicas of the first persons repeated from time to time.

Let's say the president talks about the forest with Viktor Zubkov and instructs him to turn Special attention on the mechanism of forest fund management. During a meeting with Minister of Education Andrei Fursenko, Dmitry Medvedev drew the Minister's special attention to schools from areas affected by forest fires. “I would like you to take this issue under special control,” the head of state said.

During a recent meeting with the governor of the Saratov region, the president pointed out to him: "We still have old grain that lies, it must also be pulled out and, perhaps, renewed, put in a new one."

Usually, we understand the term “manual control” to mean something else, but these examples, if you look at it, can cause bewilderment and questions: without the president, was the Minister of Education engaged on the eve of September 1 with some other, less acute and operational issues? Or: can the governor really not know that grain, in principle, needs to be changed - old to new, if the question concerns storage, especially in the current dry and extraordinary year in some respects?

The Prime Minister's conversation is built in approximately the same way. For example, in May, when the tragedy occurred at the Raspadskaya mine, Vladimir Putin held a meeting on the spot: “Pay special attention to technical means, including personal means of rescuing miners.” Or - more recently, at a meeting on fires: “I draw special attention: as a result of fires, many people have lost not only their property, but also all their documents - passports, birth certificates, pension certificates, health insurance policies, documents for housing and for road transport … Payments of pensions, other social benefits and, finally, getting housing. We need to get it under control too.” In the spring, the first persons turn to the leaders of the regions “once again with an urgent appeal - to pay attention to the spring flood in the most serious way”, closer to autumn - not to forget about the winter. They especially note: “Wage arrears must be paid off ... Do not forget about it.”

These are all very correct words. And, probably, when they are pronounced, it is understood that the listeners will appreciate the attention of the President and the Prime Minister to what is happening in the country and on the ground, and in all, even private, issues. But since the picture is usually limited to the “opening” and “closing” words, sometimes natural bewilderment arises: without a president in the region they can forget about the payment wages? About forests? And without the chairman of the government - about winter crops?

From the point of view of the “picture” and PR, everything is probably right: it is important to show what the president and the prime minister are doing today, to give each of them an information story. But in the end, both of them - in the information field - appear as lonely titans and heroes who are forced to keep all the questions in their heads, remember everything, talk about everything.

Of course, it would be absolutely unnatural if the President or the Prime Minister drew the attention of, say, the Minister of Culture to winter crops or forests. Of course, in a conversation with the minister Agriculture about winter crops - more appropriate and understandable.

But, probably, it is necessary to show interlocutors from time to time, so that it becomes clear that they are also aware of some basic issues.

pay special attention

1. The main statement of the historical school is that the economy of each country develops according to its own laws, which depend on its history, traditions, and legislation. This theory is based on this paradigm.

2. Pay attention to the non-class approach in highlighting the stages of development of the national economy (F. List). The same approach is used by institutionalists and neo-institutionalists.

3. F. List considered an active state policy necessary condition economic progress as opposed to the ʼʼlaissez faireʼʼ of the classics.

4. B. Hildebrand believed that the credit economy is the highest type of economy. The exchange takes place without the participation of money, on the basis of credit. All opportunities are open for active people: even with the help of a loan, you can become an entrepreneur. Compare with modern times.

5. Please note that some of the ideas of the historical school have something in common with the ideas of the modern school of evolutionary economics.

6. Many elements from the ʼʼhistorical schoolʼʼ were taken over by institutionalism, and therefore these schools are studied together. You can independently identify the differences between them.

7. The use of the term ʼʼinstitutʼʼ' instead of an economic category meant the desire of scientists to expand the subject of economic science, including non-economic phenomena and institutions in the analysis.

8. If the neoclassicists proceed from the thesis of the perfection of the market economic mechanism and the self-regulation of the economy, adhere to ʼʼpure economic scienceʼʼ, then institutionalists also consider spiritual, moral, legal and other factors considered in the historical context to be the driving force of the economy along with material factors. Representatives of this trend deny the decisive role of people's economic relations in the system of social relations.

10. Pay attention to the driving motives of human behavior that T. Veblen highlights.

11. T. Veblen analyzes the behavior and thinking not of an individual person, but of social groups of the population, conditioned by social motives.

12. W. Mitchell believed that government regulation - the best remedy resolution of the contradictions of capitalism, a means of counter-cyclical policy.

13. main feature W. Mitchell's ideas - the theory of a self-generated business cycle, ᴛ.ᴇ. the business cycle reproduces itself.

test questions

1. What peculiar conditions of the socio-economic development of Germany explains the emergence of the historical school?

2. Basic economic ideas of F. List.

3. What are the five stages in the evolution of the national economy distinguishes F. Liszt?

4. What is the purpose of ʼʼeducationalʼʼ protectionism according to the economic ideas of F. List?

5. Why did B. Hildebrand consider the credit economy to be the highest type of economy?

6. For ignoring what factors that have a huge impact on the motives of human activity, does B. Hildebrand criticize A. Smith and his followers?

7. WhyK. Knies rejected the very possibility of the existence of economic theory?

8. What main ideas of G. Schmoller coincided with the ideas of K. Marx?

9. The main ideas of L. Brentano.

10. How did L. Brentano justify the interest of entrepreneurs in wage growth?

11. What are the three main forms of competition identified by V. Sombart in the modern world?

12. What are the main reasons for the smoothing of market fluctuations considered by W. Sombart?

13. What is the essence of M. Weber's presentation of capitalist society as a concentrated expression of economic rationality?

14. How is it customary to understand ʼʼinstitutionʼʼ in institutionalism?

15. What are the three major economists at the origins of institutionalism?

16. Name the stages of evolution of institutionalism.

17. What are the main problems explored by institutionalism?

18. What three currents of American institutionalism do you know?

19. What are the main problems explored by socio-psychological institutionalism (T. Veblen)?

20. How does T. Veblen distinguish industry and business?

21. What, according to JR Commons, causes social conflicts?

22. W. Mitchell's contribution to economics.

23. What role did W. Mitchell assign to state regulation?

24. What role did W. Mitchell assign to money?

25. How do you understand Mitchell's theory of self-generating business cycle?

Pay special attention to the concept and types. Classification and features of the category "Pay special attention" 2017, 2018.

Be observant, getting to know a person, try to find out as much information about him as possible

1. Attention to the photos posted in his profile. If everyone has a photo of him in the company of good friends and hot chicks during the party, and you like just such entertainment - then go for it! If you're absolutely not a club girl, slow down. And do you know why? Due to the fact that this young man 99 percent needs a woman who will rock with him.

Even if you found a very attractive man, take a closer look at who exactly surrounds him in the photo. In case you don't have similar photos, chances are you don't have that much in common. In one of the photos he is with his sister, and in the other he is fond of diving or watching a football match? If you are impressed by the sports rhythm of life and are important to you family values maybe you can come up with something.

2. Avoid virtual hang-ups. If a representative of the stronger sex in the first message addresses you as “baby”, “sweet” or “baby”, this is alarming, since, first of all, this is a sign of poor education. It is very possible that he writes such letters to everyone in a row, hoping that at least someone will fall for the hook. Such young men do not need a serious relationship, be sure. Or, for example, he immediately writes that he is very wealthy and indicates the level of his own income. There is also something erroneous and disquieting here, since under no circumstances will you know what plans such people may be pursuing.

3. Find out as much as possible about him. Remember the preparation for exams - you constantly read the textbook. Before meeting with a virtual gentleman in reality, try to get as much information about him as possible. Even if he looks like an innocent lamb, in reality he may turn out to be a real psychopath. Try to "break through" it in the search engines. It is very likely that he has a blog on some of the online services. There may be more photos and information. Naturally, one should not find out everything, from now on, in which school he studied or what he ate the day before for dinner. however, before the date, it is useful to clarify the main points about the guy.

4. You must have the same sense of humor. We all want to find a young man who is caring, intelligent and certainly with a great sense of humor. This property is often mentioned in the profiles of virtual dating websites. There are, of course, people on earth who find any humor incomprehensible, but most of us still like to laugh. However, the fact that one seems ridiculous, may be absolutely ridiculous for another. We cannot amuse everyone and everyone, and not many people manage to make us laugh, but if you say something funny, and he likes it and he laughs, it is very likely that he is the one you need.

I S H O R I A, A R X E O L O G I A

UDC 94 (470.51) "18"

V. S. Vorontsov

"... TO PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO THE NEED TO TAKE MEASURES TO RESTORE THE LEGAL ORDER IN THE CASE.".

ON THE 120TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE END OF THE "MULTAN DEAL"*

The collection of documents of the CSA UR contains a selection of materials on the so-called "Multan case" - a false accusation of Udmurt peasants with. Old Multan in ritual human sacrifice. Despite numerous violations committed by the police and investigating authorities during the investigation of the crime, 7 out of 10 Udmurts involved in the case were found guilty and sentenced to hard labor. It is known that thanks to the intervention of V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni, V. I. Sukhodoev, P. M. Bogaevsky, F. A. Patenko, E. F. Bellin and others, the case received nationwide resonance. The Senate by a special decree annulled the decision of the court, a second trial was scheduled. However, only at the third trial, which took place from May 28 to June 4, 1896 in the city of Mamadysh, did the lawyers of the defendants manage to prove the illegality of the actions of the police and investigative officials, to expose the groundlessness of the conclusions of the medical and ethnographic "expertise". As a result, all convicted Udmurt peasants were acquitted. The uniqueness of the situation lies in the fact that the Senate, as the highest judicial body of the Russian Empire, twice canceled the decisions of the court in the Multan case. The article publishes the Report of the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate A.F. Koni to the Minister of Justice of the Russian Empire N.V. Muravyov, testifying to the numerous violations committed by the investigating authorities during the investigation of the Multan case. An explanatory article and comments are attached to the document.

Key words: Multan affair, national policy, fight against paganism, prejudices, falsifications, senate, V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni.

* The article was prepared as part of the implementation of the State task for educational organizations of higher education and scientific organizations subordinate to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation, on the topic “Monitoring of interethnic relations and the religious situation, analysis of the participation of state authorities, municipalities and institutions civil society in the implementation of the state national policy, migration and language policy of the Russian Federation in the regions of the Volga Federal District (Republics of Udmurtia, Mari El, Mordovia, Chuvashia, Perm Territory)”.

June 2016 marked the 120th anniversary of the end of the trial in the so-called Multan case. Trial on False Accusation of Udmurt Peasants p. Old Multan of the Malmyzhsky district of the Vyatka province. (now the village of Korolenko, Kiznersky district of the UR) in bringing a human sacrifice to the pagan gods received in the middle. 1890s wide public outcry. Interest in him remains to this day.

The basis for initiating criminal prosecution was the discovery on May 5, 1892 of the body of a Russian beggar on the path between the villages of Anyk and Chulya. The investigation, which lasted almost two and a half years, was headed by a fellow prosecutor of the Sarapul District Court, N. I. Raevsky. Based on rumors and conjectures, trying at all costs to prove the ritual nature of the crime, he and his subordinates committed numerous violations, including beatings of the accused, forgery of evidence, intimidation of witnesses, etc. , held in the city of Malmyzh on December 10-11, 1894, it was declared guilty of 7 out of 10 Udmurts involved in the case. The defender of the Multans, lawyer M. I. Dryagin, filed a cassation complaint with the Ministry of Justice - and the investigation revealed a number of omissions, incorrect and illegal actions of police and judicial officials. By a special decree, the Senate annulled the court's decision and appointed a new trial, to which it recommended involving professional experts - ethnographers and doctors.

A new trial took place on September 29 - October 1, 1895 in the city of Yelabuga and again ended with a guilty verdict. V. G. Korolenko, A. N. Baranov and V. I. Sukhodoev, who were present as correspondents for the newspaper Vyatsky Krai, took shorthand of the entire course of the trial. Publishing a report on the Multan process, V. G. Korolenko called on the advanced part of Russian society to come to the aid of the peasants. Famous scientists P.N. Luppov, P.M. Bogaevsky, V.K. Magnitsky in the press and speeches pointed to the absence of ethnographic data testifying to human sacrifices among the Udmurts. After a comprehensive analysis of the materials of the primary medical examination, leading experts in the field of forensic medicine F. A. Patenko and E. F. Bellin recognized the conclusions of the prosecution as untenable.

On a new complaint by defense counsel M. I. Dryagin, the Senate appointed a third trial. At the trial (May 28 - June 4, 1896 in the city of Mamadysh), the lawyers of the defendants M. I. Dryagin, V. G. Korolenko, P. M. Krasnikov and N. P. Karabchevsky managed to expose the illegal actions of the police during the preliminary investigations and prove the groundlessness of the conclusions of medical and scientific "expertise". The defendants were acquitted.

For multinational Russia, the Multan case, unfortunately, was not unique. The practice of fabricating "ritual processes", fed by medieval legends about human sacrifices, became widespread during the period of the Nikolaev reaction. It was then that the fight against paganism became the official course of the government. In 1848-1852 and 1854-1854. investigations were carried out over the peasants of the village of Novaya Biya and the village of Pazal-Zhikya of the Malmyzhsky district, accused of ritual murder. Great fame

also acquired the Saratov case (1853), in which Jews and Germans were charged with human sacrifice. In the conditions of a multinational country, the fabrication of "ritual cases" gave rise to rumors and gossip, prejudice and distrust among the Russian population in relation to "aliens".

The acquittal in the Multan case was a brilliant victory for the advanced Russian public, whose representatives took an active part in the fate of the slandered Multans, and through them in the fate of the entire Udmurt people. One of them was A.F. Koni, at that time chief prosecutor of the criminal cassation department of the Governing Senate. He was a man of liberal views, he became known to the general public in 1878 as the judge who acquitted the revolutionary terrorist Vera Zasulich. Thanks to his high professionalism, especially in the field of criminal justice, A.F. Koni enjoyed great prestige in society. It was for his consideration that the complaint of M. I. Dryagin fell, and with his submission, the Senate canceled the accusatory decision of the court. At the insistence of A.F. Koni, the verdict passed at the second trial was also canceled.

Recalling this case, A.F. Koni wrote: “The second annulment of the guilty verdict in the Votyak case aroused considerable displeasure in St. Petersburg official spheres. At my first official meeting with me, Minister of Justice Muravyov expressed to me his bewilderment at the too strict attitude of the Senate towards the violations committed by the court and spoke about the embarrassing situation in which it would be placed if the sovereign drew attention to the fact that one and the same court sentence twice in the same case, subject to cancellation. And that such a question could be put to him, Muravyov concluded from the fact that Pobedonostsev, who had by no means lost his influence at that time, could in no way be reconciled either with the decision of the Senate in general, or in particular with the place in my conclusion where I said that the confession of the defendants those guilty of human sacrifice to the pagan gods must be committed in full compliance with all forms and rites of legal proceedings<...>. I think, - I told him, that in this case your answer may consist in simply pointing out that the court of cassation is established precisely in order to annul sentences pronounced in violation of the fundamental conditions of justice, no matter how many times these violations are repeated. .

In the Collection of Copies of Documents on the History of Udmurtia, Revealed in the State Archives, Museums and Libraries of Russia (f. R-1655), there is a case on the accusation of the Udmurt peasants of the village of Stary Multan for 1895, which was received in the archive from the RGIA in the form of a photocopy in 2000 It contains a report of the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate A.F. Koni to the Minister of Justice N.V. Muravyov dated March 28, 1895, in which he details the events that took place in Multan and analyzes the course of the investigation, fixing numerous omissions, wrong and illegal actions of both police and judicial officials.

The report is written in black ink, neat, large handwriting. There is a resolution on the first page of the document, underlining and marginal notes made in black ink, cursive. Their authorship has not been established.

We publish it in full. The text complies with modern spelling rules, but retains the stylistic features of the original. The abbreviations and unfinished words found in the original have been restored and reproduced in brackets. Unsorted words are marked with a dot. The resolution is reproduced after the text of the document, marks - in footnotes. Editorial text is in italics.

In addition to the report, the file contains a copy of the conclusion on the termination of the investigation of the peasants of the village of Stary Multan, accused of murder for the purpose of sacrifice, dated July 27, 1894, as well as a copy of the resolution of the Sarapul District Court dated October 1, 1895 with a jury questionnaire assessors. They are not published.

Introductory article, preparation of the text for publication and comments to. and. n. V. S. Vorontsova.

Report of the Chief Prosecutor of the Criminal Cassation Department of the Governing Senate A. Koni to the Minister of Justice, Privy Councilor and Chevalier N. V. Muravyov

August 24, 1894 by the determination of the Kazan Court of Justice (consisting of chairman L. I. Grass and members B. V. Onufrovich, S. D. Babushkin, V. I. Barmaleev, I. I. Fursenko, B. B. Bera on report of B.V. Onufrovich, in the presence of Deputy Prosecutor N.F. Miller), the indictment of the Deputy Prosecutor of the Sarapulsky District Court Raevsky was approved, on the trial with the participation of jurors of the peasants of the village of Stary Multan, Sarapulsky District: Andrian Andreev,

38 years old, Dmitry Stepanova, 31 years old, Andriana Aleksandrova, 43 years old, Kuzma Samsonova, 40 years old, Vasily Kondratiev, 37 years old, Semyon Ivanova, 50 years old, Vasily Kuzmina Kuznetsova,

39 years old, Andrey Grigoriev, 90 years old, Alexander Efimov, 60 years old, Timofey Gavrilov, 35 years old and Maxim Gavrilov, 31 years old, on charges of committing a murder, with premeditated intent, on the night of May 5, 1895, a peasant from the village. Plants of Konon Matyunin, with the aim of sacrificing him to the Votsky pagan gods.

On the basis of the decision of the jurors, the verdict of the Sarapulsky district court, held on December 10-11, 1894 (as part of the presiding member of the court N. A. Goritsky, members of the court N. N. Olshamovsky, honorary justice of the peace Batuev, with the participation of a fellow prosecutor N. N. Raevsky), were found guilty of murdering Mr. Matyunin, with the aim of sacrificing to the Votsky pagan gods, peasants: Andrian Andreev, Dmitry Stepanov, Kuzma Samsonov, Vasily Kondratiev, Semyon Ivanov, Vasily Kuznetsov and Andrey Grigoriev and awarded under Part I 1454 , 2 tbsp. 19 Art. code about nak. *, 828 Art. c.u.s.**, 4 tbsp. 19 Art. code about nak. to the deprivation of all rights of the state and exile in hard labor for 10 years, with the replacement of this punishment, in accordance with 74 Art. code about nak., for Andrey Grigoriev with a reference to a settlement in remote places of Siberia. The rest of the defendants in this case were found acquitted by the court.

* Code of penal and correctional punishments of 1845 - the codification of the criminal law of pre-revolutionary Russia. As amended in 1885, it was valid until 1917.

** The Charter of Criminal Proceedings - adopted as part of the judicial reform of 1864. Established liberal principles for the consideration of criminal cases by courts (trial by jury, competitiveness of legal proceedings, etc.).

Having examined in all detail, on my instructions, this case and. Comrade Chief Prosecutor Koptev, preparing him for a report in the Governing Senate, brought to my attention that he saw in the case a number of omissions, incorrect and clearly illegal actions on the part of both police officials and officials of the judicial department who took part in proceedings of this case from the moment of its occurrence until its resolution.

May 6, 1892, on a forest path from the village. Chuli in vil. Anyk was discovered the corpse of an unknown person without a head by a twelve-year-old girl Marfa Goloviznina, who was passing in the morning. On May 7, upon notification of Goloviznina's parents, police officer Sokovikov arrived at the scene and began an inquiry. Seeing from the documents found in the bag found at the crime scene that the body belongs to a peasant] p. Plant Nyrtov Matyunin, and without compiling a protocol for examining the surrounding area and the position of the body, the police officer on May 7 reported the found body to the judicial investigator of the 2nd district. Malmyzhsky district, adding that the head and the insides taken out of the chest cavity were not found and cut out, as one might assume, according to the superstition of the Votyaks or treasure hunters, and he cannot determine whether the head was cut off during life or after the death of the found person.

On May 9, the same was reported to the judicial investigator by the bailiff of the 3rd camp of the Malmyzhsky district, who arrived at the place on the 10th of the same month and made an external examination of the body, according to which it turned out that the head had been cut off with the neck almost at the very shoulders, gore was visible in the chest cavity , while there was no blood around the body, and on the stomach there were several small crusts covered with gore. The body was dressed in peasant clothes, and the legs were shod in bast shoes, but their ropes seemed to be tightened loosely, there was a knapsack behind the shoulders, a little blood was noticed on the collar of the shirt and the zipun. A cross with a cut rope and several locks of blond, curly hair with parts of the skin torn off were found near the corpse.

Having learned from popular rumor that after 40 years the Votyaks were sacrificing a man whose head and heart were cut out for prayer with Votyaks, Timofeev, the police officer, drew attention to the neighboring Poluvot village of Stary Multan and started searching there, and in the courtyard of the peasant Moisei Dmitriev he found a trough stained with blood, and in the cage a canopy with blood stains. Without drawing up on this occasion a special seizure protocol, in the manner prescribed by 258 Art. u.u.s., and without making a detailed inspection of these things, the bailiff took them to the case and proceeded to inspect the public hut, arranged for the prayers of the votyaks at the back of the Dmitriev yard, and drew attention to the dampness of the earthen floor in its middle, and therefore at the same time he decided to take the peasant Moisei Dmitriev into custody. On May 13, the bailiff forwarded to the judicial investigator a general protocol of inquiry drawn up on the above.

The report of the police officer addressed to the judicial investigator, sent on May 7, is not marked with the date of its receipt, while the notification of the bailiff of May 9 is listed as received by the investigator on May 13.

The same number i.d. Kazansky, the judicial investigator, drew up a resolution on accepting the case for proceedings on the report of the bailiff dated May 9, No. 481, and the same resolution contains an order to invite the county doctor to autopsy the body on May 15 and to declare in force the preventive measure taken against Dmitriev by the bailiff of detention under arrest, until clarification of the situation

On May 14, the judicial investigator received a telegram from the county doctor Minkevich with the following content: “I won’t arrive on the thirteenth, I’ll notify you by attitude.” However, the promised notification is not in the file, what reasons prevented the doctor from appearing when summoned by the judicial investigator is unknown, and his telegram did not cause any orders from the investigator *.

May 17 and d. magistrate Kazansky arrived in the village. Multan, but limited himself to only the following few investigative actions: an inspection of a prayer hut in the courtyard of the Andreevs. At the same time, by inspection it was found that both in that and in the other hut the earth on the floor was damp. Without finding out the reasons for this circumstance, which may be quite natural, the judicial investigator took several handfuls of earth from the surface of the floor for research and, having dug up the earth in which the remains of animal bones were found, limited himself to that. The protocols of the forensic investigator make sure that nothing more suspicious was found, meanwhile, from the following it is clear that the same hut was examined three more times in different time(July 2, 1892, August 16, 1893, and August 17, 1893) and each time there were hairs that were examined and appeared in court as material evidence.

Having interrogated several witnesses on May 18 and 19, of which on the 19th only one witness Shcherbakov was interrogated, and.d. Kazansky did not make an external examination of the dead body, nor the area surrounding it, nor those objects (troughs and curtains) with traces of blood seen on them by the bailiff, did not interrogate the arrested person, in direct violation of Art. 398. u.s., the bailiff of the peasant Moisei Dmitriev and, as it should be assumed, left the village. Multan, suspending further investigation for unknown reasons, at the same time instructed the police officer to deliver the mentioned material evidence to his cell, which was done on June 2.

On May 29, the investigator wrote in writing to the bailiff to find out: which of the persons performing the rituals of sacrifice in the public huts of the peasants of the Votyaks with. Multan, enjoys the greatest influence in matters of their religious beliefs and diligently attends the said prayers.

Then, on May 30, the judicial investigator received a telegram from the county doctor Minkevich, attached to the case, with the following content: “I returned today, Multan will arrive on the fourth, do you agree?” It must be assumed that the judicial investigator expressed his consent, since on June 4 the autopsy of the dead body in his presence took place at the place of his location, i.e. one month after it was discovered.

From the act of a forensic medical examination of June 4, 1892, it is first known that the dead body of the peasant Matyunin was left in the forest, laid in a freshly dug hole. The same act states that the corpse was found undressed during a police examination, which is not visible from the act of police inquiry. The degree of putrefaction of the body in the act is silent. The judicial investigator, contrary to the instructions given in the decision of the general meeting of the cassation departments of the Governing Senate in 1882 (No. 49), did not draw up a special protocol for the examination and autopsy of the body, and after the autopsy left the village. Multan. Meanwhile, on June 3, 1892, that is, on the eve of the day the body was opened, the bailiff, who conducted the inquiry at the above proposal of the judicial investigator, arrested the peasants of the village. Multan Mikhail Titov, Andrian Andreev, Semyon Yakovlev, Dmitry Stepanov, Trofim Maksimov, Stepan Petrov and Ilya Terentyev, on the basis of information provided to him by the volost foreman that the peasant Mikhail Titov told him in a private conversation that Matyunin had been stabbed to death

* In the margins of the litter: According to the telegram ... the doctor was in the district.

or in the public hut of Moses Dmitriev, or in the hut of Semyon Ivanov, in which the peasants took part: Andrey Grigoriev, Alexander Efimov, Timofey and Maxim Gavrilov, the rest belong to the most influential persons among the Votyaks and take part in their religious rites.

The autopsy was carried out three miles from the village. Multan, witnesses invited from the same village were present at the autopsy, therefore it seems unlikely that the judicial investigator did not know about what happened in the village of Multan on the eve of the day of the autopsy, meanwhile, the bailiff’s inquiry about the above was marked by the fact that he received the judicial investigator on June 10, 1892. *

Despite the fact that the inquest of the bailiff did not contain any other data for the prosecution of seven people who were arrested by him without sufficient grounds, and. d. magistrate Kazansky, with the receipt of this inquiry, did not

no order in relation to the detainees and slowed down his departure for

investigation lead**.

On June 15, he interrogated local volost foreman Stepan Popugaev in the village of Stary Tryku. Moisei Dmitriev, detained by order of the bailiff from May 10, and the remaining seven people from June 3, who were kept in the same village under the local volost government, were left by the judicial investigator and this time without interrogation. Having interrogated the volost foreman, the investigator, apparently, left the named village, since in the period from June 15 to June 20, he did not undertake any investigative actions in the said case. On the same date, the investigator interrogated the peasant] vil. Kuznerki Nikolai Sannikov in his cell and on the same date for the first time examined the things sent by the police: a trough and a canopy taken from Dmitriev, which established the presence of only blood stains on them ***.

How carefully this examination was carried out is evident from the fact that when these objects were sent by the judicial investigator on September 15, 1892 to the medical department, then by examining them, carried out at the opening of the bale, a bunch of short red hair was found dried to the walls of the trough *** *.

It is impossible not to notice that the admitted slowness of sending these objects for chemical-microscopic examination of stains in the medical department made it impossible to determine whether the blood belonged to a person or a mammal, since by the time of the study the blood globules had changed their shape and size.

On June 28, 1892, the court investigator ruled that the peasants of the village of Multan of the Vot tribe, as accused of the murder of Konon Matyunin, for sacrificing him to pagan gods: Moses Dmitriev, Stepan Petrov, Dmitry Stepanov, Mikhail Titov, Trofim Maksimov, Semyon Yakovlev, Andrian Andreev, Maxim Gavrilov, Alexander Efimov, Timofey Gavrilov, Ilya Terentiev, Andrian Alexandrov and Semyon Ivanov. Of these, according to the protocols of the judicial investigator, Moisey Dmitriev, Stepan Petrov, Mikhail Titov, Alexander Efimov, Timofey Gavrilov, Ilya Terentyev, Andrey Grigoriev and Dmitry Stepanov are listed as interrogated on the same June 28 in the village of S.-Tryku. The rest were questioned on July 29, and on the same date, unless it is a mistake of the one who wrote the protocols, the decision (amended from 28 to 29) on the adoption against Moisei Dmitriev, Dmitry Stepanov, Stepan

* In the margins of the litter: The bailiff was not present.

** In the margins of the litter: The result of the autopsy. Popugaev's testimony, to whom Titov spoke. The situation of detainees.

*** On the margins of the litter: What else could be on them?

Petrov and Mikhail Titov, to prevent ways to evade trial, detention in a prison castle and to establish police supervision over the rest.

Thus, Moisei Dmitriev, who was detained by the bailiff on May 10, was held without interrogation until June 28, 1892, Mikhail Titov, Andrian Andreev, Semyon Yakovlev, Dmitry Stepanov, Trofim Maksimov, Stepan Petrov and Ilya Terentyev, who were detained by the bailiff on June 3, were interrogated on June 28 and 29 July.

According to the acts of the preliminary investigation, it is impossible to establish whether there is a simple mistake in the protocols of interrogation of the named persons dated the 29th and in the decision dated the same date, or whether these persons were indeed interrogated not in June, but in July, and this circumstance can only be clarified by an investigation. *.

At the same time, State Councilor Koptev cannot fail to notice that certain circumstances testify in favor of the assumption that these persons were interrogated, and the decision on the measure of suppression of ways to evade court was drawn up only in July, since in the heading of the last protocols, unlike the first, it is not mentioned that the accused were interrogated according to the decision of the same June 28, as mentioned in the first, then it should be noted that during the month of July no other investigative actions were taken in this case. In addition, two of the last defendants, Andrian Aleksandrov and Semyon Ivanov, are shown interrogated in another place, namely in the village. Old Multan.

It was mentioned above that the public hut for votsky prayers in the courtyard of Moisei Dmitriev was inspected on May 13, 1892 by the bailiff and on May 17 of the same May by the judicial investigator, after which, judging by the protocols of the investigation, it is not clear that it was sealed and access to it unauthorized persons were blocked. Meanwhile, on July 4, the bailiff forwarded to the judicial investigator a new protocol of inspection of this hut drawn up by him on July 2, undertaken, as can be seen from the protocol itself, on the basis that during the autopsy of the corpse, injuries were noticed on Matyunin's legs that could have occurred from hanging his body. During this examination, on one of the beams, a strand of cut hair was seen by the bailiff, according to the conclusion of the named official, similar to the hair found at the location of the corpse **.

Only on August 10, 1892, the judicial investigator examined and compared this hair with the hair found near the corpse, and it was stated that between the latter there were White hair, which is not in the hair found in the hut.

More than a month later, on September 23, 1892, under No. 902, the judicial investigator sent these hairs for examination to the medical department of the Vyatka provincial government ***. From the act of the medical department it can be seen that the hair was received from the investigator in two bags: No. 1 - with the inscription: "Hair found at the corpse of Konon Matyunin" and No. 2 - with the inscription: "Hair found in Dmitriev's hut." Among the latter, in the amount of 97 hairs, according to the conclusion of the medical department, 5 hairs belong to a person, the rest to animals, moreover, these 5 hairs do not belong to the person from whom the hair was removed, contained in the package under No. 1.

More than a year after the last inspection of the worldly hut, located in the courtyard of Dmitriev, namely on August 16, 1893, the bailiff of the 4th camp of Malmyzhsky

* In the margins of the litter: Quite clearly on June 29, because ... this protocol was received on July 9 correspondence.

the county again examined the same hut, without explaining the reasons for such an inspection, and found two tables in it with traces of blood, and on the upper crossbar, in the same place where the hair had been found before, another thin, long one stuck to the tree red hair and a few small hairs.

Following that, on August 17, 1893, and. Kazansky, the investigator of the court, in the presence of Comrade Prosecutor Raevsky, again examined the same hut and on the same crossbar he saw several more white thin hairs, on which he did not draw up a decision to attach to the case and did not describe the size of which *.

On September 15, the forensic investigator sent for examination and comparison with the hair of the late Matyunin, to the Vyatka medical department, the hair, it is not known when and by whom it was found and not exactly described by him.

Only in the act of the medical department is a proper, accurate description of this hair, and it turns out that there were only three of them, of which: one is long red and two are gray. By examining and comparing these hairs with those found on the corpse, the medical department found that one of the three, gray hair, belongs to a person and is similar in structure to Matyunin's hair. Thus, the above study, as it were, created a new piece of evidence against the accused, based on a hair found in a secular hut a year and three months after the murder of Matyunin.

The absence in the case of exact information about which hair, when and where it was taken from, was subjected to research in this case, gave grounds for the defense counsel to ask for clarifications at the court: where did the gray hair, similar to Matyunin's hair, come from, but the court could not give any explanation on this matter, meanwhile, in the closing speech, according to the defender, the presiding judge mentioned this, as he put it, treacherous hair, and this circumstance is not rejected by the explanation of the court.

In addition to the wrong actions described during the slow, long-term investigation, other omissions can be seen from the case.

So, it is impossible not to pay attention to the fact that and. d. Investigator Kazansky conducted an inspection of the area in which the corpse of Matyunin was found, only as a result of a written proposal from Comrade Prosecutor Raevsky of January 10, 1893, on the 13th day of that month, i.e. 8 months after the murder was discovered.

On January 14, 1893, he examined the blood stains on the clothes of a peasant on Kuzma Samsonov (a butcher by profession) **, brought to the case as an accused on December 2, 1892, sent by a police officer with a report from the

the same December ***, which, however, is not at all in the case, and the circumstances under which the clothes were taken from Samsonov are established only by the interrogation of the police officer Sakovikov, who testified that he, on behalf of the assistant prosecutor, went to the village. Multan to inspect Samsonov's house and there, in the absence of the latter, on November 30, 1892, found a shirt and trousers in blood.

On January 10, 1893, at the suggestion of Comrade Prosecutor Raevsky, the accused Stepan Petrov and Mikhail Titov, who had been taken into custody by the bailiff, were released under special police supervision, but on July 31 of the same year, the bailiff of the 4th camp again arrested the same Mikhail Titov, on that grounds that he confessed to the murder of Matyunin. The bailiff also acted with the defendant Semyon Ivanov, who was left at large, the judicial investigator. The decrees drawn up to this effect

* The paragraph is highlighted in the margins by two parallel lines.

with an inquiry from the bailiff, they came to the judicial investigator on August 5, 1893, but did not promptly call for any orders from him *.

Only on the 17th of the same August did the judicial investigator arrive in the village. Multan and, having interrogated Semyon Ivanov, decided to keep him in custody. Mikhail Titov was by that time released from arrest by order of the bailiff himself.

The investigation that arose on May 13, 1892 in this case, due to the slowness that the investigating judge showed, was completed only in June 1894.

When this case was forwarded, Raevsky, Deputy Prosecutor of the Sarapul District Court, drew up an indictment against the above-named persons and a conclusion on the termination of the investigation on charges of Moisey Dmitriev and his wife Vasilisa for their death, Stepan Petrov, Ilya Terentyev, Trofim Maksimov, Semyon Yakovlev and Mikhail Titov due to the fact that all of them were brought to the case as defendants on the sole basis that they performed in s. Multan the duties of the priests, and Mikhail Titov, in addition, because he contributed to the disclosure of the murder and its perpetrators and should be the main witness in this case.

The named Mikhail Titov, who was called as a witness, however, did not justify the hopes placed on him at the trial and stated, as the record of the court session assures, that the testimony given by him during the investigation was forced by beatings and tortures of the bailiff.

Turning to the indictment drawn up by the Deputy Prosecutor of the Sarapul District Court, State Councilor Koptev finds that it does not contain an entirely accurate and correct presentation of the material collected by the preliminary investigation, and even some distortion of circumstances to the detriment of the defendants. So, for example: regarding the trough and canopy found at Moisei Dmitriev’s, the act says, “that, according to a study in the medical department, the blood both in the trough and on the canopy turned out to be from mammals”, meanwhile, from the message of the medical department on the name of the magistrate can be seen that due to the destruction of the blood balls, the source of the stains on the canopy cannot be determined. Further, the act says that on two crossbeams, along the entire worldly hut for prayers in the courtyard of Dmitriev, a lot of hair from animals was found, including one hair, according to the study of the medical department, which is quite similar to Matyunin's hair that stuck to his corpse, but at the same time, it is silent about when, under what circumstances and by whom these hairs were discovered, while the totality of precisely these data completely undermines the significance of this evidence. Further, citing the data collected by the investigation in relation to the accused Kuzma Samsonov, the deputy prosecutor enters the following in the indictment: “As for the latter, from the very moment of Matyunin’s murder, there was a persistent rumor among the people that Kuzma Samsonov had stabbed the beggar (Matyunin), known for being the best butcher in Old Multan." Then he makes sure that during a search in his house a shirt and trousers with blood stains were found, while silently saying that the named clothes were taken by a police officer in the house of Kuzma Samsonov on November 30, 1892, i.e. seven months after it was committed a crime. It is further stated that the witness Alexei Ivanovich Stukov certified that Kuzma Samsonov confessed to him in the murder of Matyunin, silent about the circumstances under which this happened according to the explanation of the witness himself, taking away any faith in the veracity of his testimony, etc.

Regardless of this, it is impossible to express extreme surprise that in this case, which is out of the ordinary in terms of the very method of depriving a person of life and requiring

* From the words of July 31 to the words of the bailiff, the paragraph in the margin is marked with square brackets (l. 29).

who received detailed answers from a medical specialist to many questions, to clarify the charges against the defendants, the medical expert was not summoned to the court session at all. This is all the more incomprehensible because the conclusion of the doctor who performed the autopsy of Matyunin's body does not explain the blisters with gore on the belly of the deceased, described in the protocol of the external examination of the body, which are described in the doctor's report as brownish spots, as if burned and penetrating into subcutaneous tissue. Meanwhile, the presence of these spots, apparently, is connected with the stories cited in the indictment about how the Votyaks extract blood from their victims during prayers.

At the same time, it is impossible not to express regret over the fact that the prosecution authorities, starting with the deputy prosecutor of the district court, who supervised the proceedings of the investigation, and ending with the judicial chamber, which approved the indictment, did not come to the aid of the judicial investigator, who was looking in vain for an expert in the religious beliefs of the Votyaks, in the form of elucidation of the material collected by the investigation and the elimination from the case of everything that is not justified by scientific research. Whereas on the question of the religious beliefs of the Votyaks, which break up into many separate tribes and religious unions, and in particular the Votyaks of the Sarapul district, there is a whole literature (Bogaevsky “Essays on the life of the Sarapul Votyaks”, Smirnov “Votyaki”, Ostrovsky “Votyaks of the Kazan province”, Vereshchagin "Votiaks of the Sarapulsky district, Pervukhin, etc.).

From the foregoing, it is seen that, despite the clearly wrong and even directly illegal actions and. d. judicial investigator 2 account. Malmyzhsky district of Kazan on the production of a preliminary investigation in a case of special importance, the Kazan Chamber of Justice, transferring the accused to the court, did not pay due attention to them and, by its ruling of August 24, 1894, recognized the investigation as having been carried out without violating the essential forms and rituals of legal proceedings.

Finally, it is impossible not to touch upon what took place in the court session in the case of the murder of Konon Matyunin, on the content of the complaint of the defendant's lawyer, private attorney Dryagin, filed by him in addition to the cassation complaint on March 10 of this month. If what is described in it is exaggerated, then in any case much finds confirmation for itself in the proceedings themselves and in the explanations presented by the court on the basis of comments on the minutes of the court session.

So, for example, it seems in the case undoubted and sufficiently proven that at the trial too wide scope was given to all unverified rumors about the event of the crime and the beliefs of the Votyaks, that the requirement of 718 Art. w.c. it was not fulfilled that the presiding judge in the present case reveals insufficient knowledge of the case, having made erroneous explanations to the jurors about the material evidence and the results of their examination, that the court did not take dependent and absolutely necessary measures to explain the question raised by the defense as to when, by whom and under what circumstances the hair subjected to examination by the medical department was attached to the case as material evidence.

Fully sharing the views expressed by State Councilor Koptev about a number of incorrect, illegal and, in the sense of injustice, outstanding actions committed in this case, I instructed him in his conclusion before the Governing Senate to draw the special attention of the highest court to the need, in accordance with Article 534 of Art. w.c. and 249, 249.1 and 250 Art. const. court. mouth, taking measures to restore the unexecuted by the chamber legal order in the case and, at the same time, I consider it my duty to submit all of the above to the discretion of Your Excellency, adding that the case is being heard in the Governing Senate on April 15 and that

“...Pay particular attention to the need for action......._^^^

the following resolution will be submitted to you immediately in addition to the present submission.

And about. Chief Prosecutor A. Koni

CGA UR. F.R-1655. Op. 3. D. 62. L. 4-40. Manuscript. Copy. RGIA. F. 1405. Op. 96. D. 5606. L. 1-18v. Manuscript. Script.

Resolution: Now, with the prescription of what is stated in the report, demand detailed information from the prosecutor of the Kazan judicial chamber, from. - an explanation from comrade [a] prosecutor[uror] of the Sarapulsky District Court [court] Raevsky, the prosecutor of the Sarapulsky District Court and Comrade. Procur[uror] of the Kazan Judicial Chamber [at] Miller regarding the wrong actions committed during the proceedings. March 30*.

NOTES

1. Vinberg A. I. Black dossier of expert falsifiers. M., 1990; Vanyushev V. M. Kin blinkers "ybyle" Multan already? Izhevsk, 1994; Bunya M. I. Korolenko in Udmurtia. Izhevsk: Udmurtia, 1995; Sheptalin A. Legal aspect of the Multan case in Udmurtia // New wave in the study of the ethnopolitical history of the Volga-Ural region. Sat. articles / Ed. K. Matsuzato. Sapporo, 2003, pp. 225-262; Multan case: history and modern look. Materials of the scientific-practical conference. Izhevsk: UIIYAL UrO RAN, 2000; History of Udmurtia: the end of the XV - the beginning of the XX century. Izhevsk: UIIYAL UB RAN, 2004.

2. Koni A.F. On the path of life. Sobr. op. T. 5, L., 1929. S. 296-297.

Received 27.07.2016

"...Pay Particular Attention to the Necessity of Taking Action

on Legal Order Restoration on the Case...".

On the 120th Anniversary of the End of the Multan Case

The collection of documents kept in the Central State Archive of the Republic of Udmurtia includes a selection of materials on the so-called "The Multan Case" which was false accusation of Udmurt peasants living in the village of Stary Multan of Malmyzhsky District in Vyatka Gubernia for making human sacrifices. Despite numerous violations committed by police and investigating authorities during crime investigation, seven of ten Udmurts involved in the case were found guilty and sentenced to hard labor. This case caused a huge national outcry owing to the Russian public representatives V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni, V. I. Sukho-doev, P. M. Bogayevsky, F. A. Patenko, E. F. Bellin, and others. The Senate issued a special decree falsifying the judgment and ordering a retrial. However, only in the third trial, which took place from May 28 to June 4, 1896 in the town of Mamadysh, the defendants" lawyers could prove the illegality of the actions taken by police and investigating authorities and could expose groundlessness of the conclusions of the medical and ethnographic "expertise".

* Signature missing.

result, all the prisoners were justified. The situation is unique as the Senate, the highest judicial authority of the Russian Empire, twice falsified a judgment on the Multan case. The article presents Chief Prosecutor at the Criminal Cassation Department of the Senate A. F. Cony's report to N. V. Muraviev, the Minister of Justice of the Russian Empire. The report described numerous violations made by investigating authorities during the investigation of the Multan case. Explanatory article and comments are attached to the document.

Keywords: Multan case, national policy, fight against paganism, superstitions, falsifications, Senate, V. G. Korolenko, A. F. Koni.

Vorontsov Vladimir Stepanovich

Candidate of Historical Sciences, Senior Researcher, Udmurt Institute of History, Language and Literature, Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 426004, Russia, Izhevsk, st. Lomonosova, 4 [email protected]

Vorontsov, Vladimir Stepanovich

Candidate of Sciences (History), Senior Research Associate, Udmurt Institute of History, Language and Literature of the Ural Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences 426004, Russia, Izhevsk, Lomonosov St., 4 E-mail: [email protected]